Many people are familiar with geologic faults, such as the San Andreas fault.
A fault line is the where the discontinuity between the two sides of the geographic fault becomes visible as the stresses in the fault causes the two sides to slip past each other.
This fence (located near Point Reyes CA) was separated by the 1906 San Francisco earthquake.
Fault lines also exist within organizations, the Catholic Church and religious congregations are no exception.
In an organization multiple fault lines will exist between the primary and various sub-cultures. As long as there is sufficient commonality between the two cultures and no pressure (challenging of cultural assumptions) is applied, the difference between the cultures remains hidden beneath the surface. However, once pressure is applied the differences between the two cultures becomes evident as the slip fault in the picture above.
At this point, fault lines are coming to the surface in both the Church as a whole and the Society of St. Pius the Tenth (SSPX) as cultural assumptions are being challenged in both organizations.
In the case of the Catholic Church, both external and internal pressure is being applied apparently with two aims:
A fault line is the where the discontinuity between the two sides of the geographic fault becomes visible as the stresses in the fault causes the two sides to slip past each other.
This fence (located near Point Reyes CA) was separated by the 1906 San Francisco earthquake.
Fault lines also exist within organizations, the Catholic Church and religious congregations are no exception.
In an organization multiple fault lines will exist between the primary and various sub-cultures. As long as there is sufficient commonality between the two cultures and no pressure (challenging of cultural assumptions) is applied, the difference between the cultures remains hidden beneath the surface. However, once pressure is applied the differences between the two cultures becomes evident as the slip fault in the picture above.
At this point, fault lines are coming to the surface in both the Church as a whole and the Society of St. Pius the Tenth (SSPX) as cultural assumptions are being challenged in both organizations.
In the case of the Catholic Church, both external and internal pressure is being applied apparently with two aims:
- To prevent the Pope from regularizing the SSPX without an unconditional acceptance of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council.
- That the Church does not deviate from the "world's" interpretation of the documents of the Second Vatican Council.
If the SSPX were to be regularized without accepting the Second Vatican Council in entirety, it would signal that one can criticize the teachings and evolving liturgy of the Second Vatican Council as the SSPX does, and remain within the Catholic Church. Further it could be interpreted that the theological position of the SSPX concerning the four documents that it holds as contradicting Church Teaching could be correct.
This not an acceptable situation to a number of groups both in and outside the Church.
In the case of the SSPX, while there is external pressure to accept the Council, internally the possibility of a regularization of the SSPX definitely challenged a number of assumptions held by some of its priests, laity and even one of the four Bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre.
The exact nature of the 'assumption' remains difficult to discern from the more vocal opponents to the regularization, a regularization that did not occur. Given the spawning of conspiracy theories that occurred after the June meeting of Bishop Fellay and the Cardinal Levada, when Bishop Fellay was refused to compromise on the principles of the SSPX, I would conclude that there are at least two opinions behind this opposition.
The first opinion is that the Pope is not the Pope, the so-called sedevacantist thesis. I point this out not because I believe that everyone that who opposes a no-compromise regularization is sedevacantist, but because I have qualitatively noted that some sedevacantists are 'rabid' in their opposition to the Pope and therefore oppose any regularization of the SSPX.
The second opinion, I believe, is related to a deep distrust of the Pope as well as the hierarchy in general. There are ample reasons for this distrust and this distrust has been reinforced numerous times over the past 40+ years.
However, this distrust is not a reliable 'principle' by which one can make decisions. The reason is that distrust is a subjective opinion about the interiour motivations of the person who is the focus of this distrust.
I believe that the principle of St. Thomas, invoked by Bishop Fellay, is a much better guide in determining when submission is required. When I first read this part of the Summa, I noted that trust has nothing to do with when submission to a superiour is required. This places the principle in the sphere of objective reality.
From an cultural point of view when someone perceives a change in culture or discovers that the organization that they belong to does not actually hold the same cultural assumptions and values, there are three possible outcomes:
- Change
- Fight
- Flight / Leave
Whether or not Bishop Fellay was justified (I believe he was) in these actions is irrelevant from this perspective. The culture of the SSPX is strong and those with equally strong but misaligned cultural assumptions have now left or been expelled.
From this point of view, the cultural assumptions have been put into bold relief for its members. The culture has been reinforced: when the Pope issues a command or even a simple request that does not go against the Faith, then it requires obedience. The exact structure of a command that meets the principle of St. Thomas, I trust Bishop Fellay to discern.
Those who are 'misaligned' to such a degree that they fight this cultural assumption, one that I maintain has always been present within the SSPX, will eventually leave or be expelled since it is obvious that they are the ones misaligned and not the SSPX.
P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience
Comments
Post a Comment